Will there be voting on the weight, or is that a fixed decision?
We should get the option to vote on this.
Hello my friend, unfortunately, there will not be a poll for the weight. As I said, I am super excited about the new weight as it will look super sick! The background is that after R1 run, many have PM'd me about a redesign of the weight for R2 to be something slicker which I agreed. Again, any design cannot please everyone, but if you really hate it I certainly can understand and I am not trying to convince you that it is perfect, and thanks for the support and feedback. Given I am not in this for the money, I do not intend to poll everything or change major designs according to polls. Polls only inform me on whether anything absolutely needs to be changed. So far I think most things are polling as I a priori excepted, except the '2020' logo which was removed. I feel that I already changed a bit more than I originally wanted but because that was for the betterment of the aesthetics, I am happy with how this turned out.
With all being said, after prototyping is done, I will take real pictures of all badges made and likely have another vote for which one to be made. I can probably make 2 badges max for each layout. I intend to offer lightbulb as the default and 1 optional marine theme badge.
Wouldn't you want to see if that's something that might absolutely need to be changed? I still don't see how your brain can reconcile fish/boats with thinking. That's insane cognitive dissonance, which is all the more ironic given the name you're trying to push for it. This should've been named something else, like the anchor 65 or whatever, not think. I agree that a new weight would be more ideal, but it should be related to thinking, not sinking.
Again, thanks for the feedback. But let's just agree to disagree. Further debates on the weight design are unnecessary.
There is no such thing as agreeing to disagree, Aumann's Agreement Theorem literally states otherwise. Either one of us is wrong, or we're both wrong. Someone else other than you should be in charge of 'thinking' how this should look like, you're full of contradictions and weak logic.
To clarify, do you think the anchor doesn't look good? Or are you upset because you don't feel the board's design fits its name, irrespective of how the anchor looks? Would you otherwise like the board if its name were nautically-themed? If you do think the board looks good even though you disapprove of the combination of the design and name, do you feel so strongly about it that you will not be able to bring yourself to buy one despite the fact that the weight faces downward and is infrequently seen relative to the top case?
There is nothing wrong with disliking the board or disagreeing with the alignment of its design and stated design philosophy. However, Oldcat is also entitled to make executive decisions, even if not everyone likes them. That may come at a cost; some may dislike them enough that they won't join the GB, and that's on Oldcat. If too many people disagree with his design decisions, the GB will fail, and that's also on Oldcat. I would urge you to say that though, if that's your position. Knowing that you won't be joining the GB, why, and what it would take for you to join is valuable feedback. Resorting to trying to insult your way to getting what you want is not.
For what it's worth, I happen to agree with you. I don't feel the anchor aligns with the 'think' name and theme. That being said, I happen to also think the board looks good, and I don't strongly care about whether or not the aesthetics align with the design philosophy of someone I've never met.
